The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-misunderstanding and misapprehension of legal principles do not constitute the element of the crime of excavating a grave because the instant grave was merely a dead grave or a grave, and the Defendant, as the head of E, has the authority to manage the instant grave as his descendants, and thus, the act of excavating the instant grave constitutes a justifiable act. Even if there is no management authority, the right to manage the grave is vested in the grave.

The court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case in spite of the absence of the awareness of illegality since there is just ground to believe that it was discovered as well as based on a lawful opening report. The court below erred in the misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (six months of imprisonment, one year of suspended sentence, and eight hours of community service order) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination on the misapprehension of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

가. 원심의 판단 원심은, ㉠ D 측은 1822. 7. 2. 사망한 망 E이 매장된 이 사건 분묘를 조성ㆍ관리하다가 1999. 10. 1. 석물 및 비석을 세워 단장하여 제사 숭경하고 종교적 예의를 계속하여 왔던 점, ㉡ 피고인은 D 측이 관리하는 이 사건 분묘로 인해 이 사건 토지를 처분함에 곤란을 겪게 되었고, 이에 D 측에 분묘 이장을 대가로 합의 금을 제안하였으나 여의치 않자 이 사건 분묘의 관리권을 주장하면서 D 측의 동의 없이 이 사건 분묘를 개장한 점, ㉢ 이 사건 분묘는 190년 이상 경과되어 이 사건 분묘를 개장할 당시에 유골 등이 토 괴화되었을 가능성이 커 보이는 점, ㉣ 피고인이 이 사건 분묘를 개장할 당시 관할 관청에 분묘 개장 신고를 하였다고

On the ground that it cannot be seen as a legitimate act, it found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case.

B. 1) Determination of the party deliberation 1) Determination on the assertion that constitutes the elements of the composition, and the circumstances that the court below properly states.